|
The product was not returned for evaluation.Without the return of the device, the root cause of the problem cannot be determined.The manufacturing records for this lot were reviewed and did not reveal any outstanding discrepancies, design, or quality concerns.This report is associated with mfr report numbers: 3005168196-2020-00928, 3005168196-2020-00929.
|
|
The patient was undergoing a coil embolization procedure in the splenic artery using ruby coils and a non-penumbra microcatheter.It was reported that the patient had high flow vessels.During the procedure, the physician advanced three ruby coils individually to the target vessel and attempted to form each ruby coil.However, the ruby coils would not form and were re-sheathed.After being re-sheathed, two of the ruby coils were unable to advance out of their introducer sheaths.The physician then re-advanced the third ruby coil, and while placing the ruby coil in the target vessel, the ruby coil formed approximately 70% but flowed back across the splenic artery and past the celiac trunk.Subsequently, the physician decided to re-sheath the ruby coil again; however, it unintentionally detached partially in the microcatheter and partially in the splenic artery.Therefore, the physician flushed the remaining coil out of the microcatheter and into the vessel.No attempt was made to remove the detached ruby coil.The procedure ended at this point.There was no report of an adverse effect to the patient.
|